constructing deviance adler and adler

Download Constructing Deviance   Adler and Adler

Post on 30-Dec-2015

142 views

Category:

Documents

9 download

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Constructing Deviance Adler and Adler. Part IV. I. Moral Entrepreneurs: Campaigning. Awareness Moral Conversion Moral Panic. Part 4. A. Moral Entrepreneurs. Those who construct moral meanings & associate them with particular acts or conditions by drawing on power & resources of: - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

  • Part IV

  • AwarenessMoral ConversionMoral PanicPart 4

  • Those who construct moral meanings & associate them with particular acts or conditions by drawing on power & resources of:InstitutionsAgenciesSymbols or ideasCommunication to audiencesPart 4

  • Rule-creating: politicians, public crusaders, teachers, parents, school administrators, business leadersRule-enforcing: police, prosecutors, judges, and other informal agents of control such as dormitory RAs

    Part 4

  • By individualsFirst Lady Nancy Reagan Just Say No; John Walsh for founding Missing and Exploited Childrens Network and the TV show Americas Most Wanted; Michael Moore for documentaries about big business and violenceBy Groups Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD)Group Against Smoking Pollution (GASP)

    Part 4

  • Moral entrepreneurs manufacture public morality through a multi-stage process, beginning first with the generation of awareness of a problemClaims-making: danger-messages are generated about specific issues such as drunken-driving, hate crimes, second-hand smoke, outsourcing, school violenceIn this stage will draw upon experts and employ several rhetorical methods including statistics and particular case examples

    Part 4

  • Claimsmakers must draw on elements of drama, novelty, politics and cultural myths to gain visibility for their issueThey seek to attract media attention through hunger strikes, demonstrations, civil disobedience, marches, and picketing They seek support of sponsors and opinion leaders celebrities for public endorsements

    Part 4

  • Temporary but widespread concern about an issue, promoted by much media attention and sometimes legislative attention, takes center stage

    Triggered by specific event at right moment, draw attention to a specific group as a target, have provocative content revealed, and supported by formal and informal communication outlets

    Part 4

  • MoneyRace and ethnicityGenderAgePart 4

  • Money: can be used for campaign contributions to sway politicians to favor and disfavor new laws, to fund favorable research, and to fight restrictive lawsuits Race and ethnicity: dominant white group behaviors less likely to be defined and enforced as deviant Gender: women have less social power than males are more subject to labelingAge: Younger and older people hold less respect in our society

    Part 4

  • Part 4

  • Same powerful groups have greater resources to avoid being labeledThey may hire media and legal experts to foster positive collective images: gun owners are upstanding citizens, drug or alcohol companies promote favorable imagesDifferential Social PowerPart 4

  • How do powerful groups avoid being labeled?How are rules created and implemented?

    Part 4

  • Part IVChapter 15

  • Part 4: Ch. 15

  • The cultural origins and nature of anti-drug appeals must be understood

    Drug wars & anti-drug crusades involving marked public concern about a specific drug or drugs are not simply reflections of problems people are experiencing: Such drug scares are a recurring social phenomena in their own rightPart 4: Ch. 15

  • Alcohol: Temperance Movement to Prohibition; primarily led by middle-class, Protestant, white (WASP) Americans reacting to drinking behaviors of Catholic immigrants from EuropePart 4: Ch. 15

  • Anti-opium den laws of San Francisco in 1875 directed against Chinese immigrants

    Anti-marijuana laws of Great Depression directed at Mexican Americans and later connected to drop-out, hippie counterculture that was corrupting morality of the youth

    More recently in 1980s the crack cocaine scare, directed against urban, poor African- AmericansPart 4: Ch. 15

  • A kernel of truthMedia magnificationPolitico-moral entrepreneurs Professional interest groupsHistorical context of conflictLink a form of drug-use to a dangerous classScapegoating a drug for a variety of social problems

    Part 4: Ch. 15

  • Part 4: Ch. 15

  • First, claims about evil of drugs provide a welcome vocabulary of attribution and something to blame for social problems Second, American society, predicated on Protestantism and capitalism emphasize self-control; As a result loss of such control is to be avoided at all cost! Third, we live today in a new consumer culture that exacerbates the issue of self-control; It is this on-going dynamic between self-control and self-indulgence that empowers our drug scares

    Part 4: Ch. 15

  • Of the drugs that are classified as illegal, which ones are thought to be the most serious or dangerous?What are drug scares and in what ways are they correlated with minority groups? Part 4: Ch. 15

  • Part IVChapter 16

  • Deviance is socially constructed The ability to define and construct reality is closely connected to the power structure of society Status conflicts, and resultant status degradation ceremonies of behavior characteristic of a lower status, enhance the status of those who condemn and abstain from such behavior Deviance creates political competition in which moral entrepreneurs originate moral crusades aimed at generating reform Such moral crusades are dominated by members of upper social strata of society

    Status Politics & the Creation of DeviancePart 4: Ch. 16

  • Moral crusades may be either assimilative or coercive reforms Assimilative: sympathy for deviant engenders integrative efforts aimed at lifting the repentant to higher moral plane of the upper status group (education) Coercive: deviants viewed as denying moral and status superiority of reformers (law and force)Moral entrepreneur cannot succeed alone: must enlist broader public support

    Status Politics & the Creation of DeviancePart 4: Ch. 16

  • Political dynamics involved in construction of deviance may be seen in the efforts to end smoking in public facilities Cigarette smoking universally accepted in 1940s, 1950s and 1960s until surgeon generals report on health risks of smoking in 1964 More people today see smoking as socially deviant, unclean and intrusive to others

    The Status Politics of Cigarette Smoking Part 4: Ch. 16

  • Abstinence and bodily purity are key to nonsmokers claim of moral superiority Antismoking movement has targeted a lifestyle typical of the working classes; Moral entrepreneurs crusading against smoking are of higher social status, the knowledge class of educators, therapeutic and counseling professions Early remedial efforts focused on publicizing the perils of smoking, reflecting a strategy of assimilative reform through education:Resulted in decline in smoking

    The Status Politics of Cigarette Smoking Part 4: Ch. 16

  • Remaining smokers have become redefined as enemy Focus of social control efforts to ban smoking in public places as evidence mounted on adverse effects of smoking on nonusersSuccess of antismoking crusade rooted in moral crusaders ability to mobilize power, aided by government campaigns, and widely publicized health risks of smoking Success of this moral crusade also related to deviance being connected with lower social status groups, whose stigmatization reinforce existing power structure

    The Status Politics of Cigarette Smoking Part 4: Ch. 16

  • Study hypothesis: supporters of smoking ban would be of higher social status than those opposing it Site of research: Shasta County, California Referendum to ban smoking in public places passed by 56% majority; special election by those opposing it lost again by 58% majority;Ordinance went into effect July,1993 Part 4: Ch. 16

  • Interviews with five leading moral entrepreneurs and five status quo defenders Primary concern of moral entrepreneurs was health but three also made negative comments about smoking, thereby degrading the status of smokers Part 4: Ch. 16

  • Smoking is no longer an acceptable actionSmoke stinksIt is just a dirty and annoying habit

    Part 4: Ch. 16

  • Status quo defenders also had two arguments: a persons right (freedom) and business profits Smoking viewed as a constitutionally protected right of free individualsWorries about loss of smoking customers with a ban Part 4: Ch. 16

  • Debate between proponents of ban to prohibit smoking in public places versus those defenders of individuals right to decide where to smoke reflect a difference in social power Winners in moral and stigma contests generally represent higher social classes, involve symbolic dimension, and this was reflected in current studyPart 4: Ch. 16

  • Is the association of tobacco with lower-status persons a factor in the crusade against smoking in public facilities? Compare anti-smoking campaigns to those of the tobacco company and its glorification in the movies. How mixed are the messages?

    Part 4: Ch. 16

Recommended

View more >